Your questions answered #1 - Decodables, student goals and secondary

Welcome to the first of many shorter posts where I seek to address questions from you and share potential answers with all readers in the Cognitorium.

For this post we will look at introducing decodable texts at your school, individualised student goals, and instruction informed by the science of learning in the upper years of secondary.

💬 We have our decodable texts ready, but how best can I introduce them at my school?

To move from having a range of levelled readers (sometimes referred to as predicable texts) to the introduction of some decodable text is a big move.

Some schools I have worked with have jumped into this challenge without issue; Others have had rocky starts. It is not easy to secure teacher interest, buy-in, and understanding of how to use these pedagogical tools. I don’t pretend to have a definitive guide here, and have instead shared some brief actions to consider.

1. Access professional learning that explains systematic synthetic phonics.

Ensure you and your teachers understand SSP and how it differs from ‘phonics in context’ or analytic approaches. Decodables are intended to be used alongside a clear scope and sequence and explicit teaching of code knowledge, phonemic awareness and reading/spelling words.

Decodables do not replace the explicit teaching - they are an opportunity to practice accurate and fluent reading on patterns and irregular words that are being taught in the sequence.

2. Explain to your staff how decodables do not provide a benchmark ‘level’

Historically, benchmarking systems have been used to determine what ‘level’ a student is up to for reading. The validity of this practice has been called into question. Nonetheless, the levels of decodable texts are nowhere near a benchmarking criterion. Instead they are just a way of organising books with which students can practice.

3. Access professional learning on how to facilitate fluency pairs in your classroom

This is a vital daily routine to use with decodable readers in the early years of school to ensure accountable and appropriate fluency practice. See this video on fluency pairs from colleagues at Teaching Together.

4. Allow students to take decodables home!

If they are still using decodables at school, don’t make students practice on old, levelled readers at home. Predictable texts often encourage using ’other cues’ rather than the word in front of them.

Decodables are not a replacement for ACTUAL LITERATURE

5. Don’t analyse decodable texts like they are rich literature.

Remember, decodables are designed to practice word reading skills based on the code that students are learning. These days many decodables DO have great stories and illustrations, but nevertheless these are not a replacement for ACTUAL LITERATURE. They are a tool for practice.

If you are modelling or guiding comprehension skills or teaching vocabulary or story structure - Do that on an uncontrolled text! See student readers and read-aloud units on Core Knowledge Language Arts (CKLA) for example!

Check out the following:

- Literacy Hub free resources on all things phonics and decodables

- Five from five on decodables

- TFE blog on decodables from SPELD NSW team

- Short video from Louisa Moats on how long to use decodable text.

💬 Should I put effort into individualised student goals?

Many researchers are keen on the idea of individualised student goals, as there is some correlational evidence that goal setting is associated with higher motivation and also achievement. Many schools have adopted practices of every student having a particular goal which should be reviewed regularly. I have worked at schools where these have been required from all teachers for each student.

I am a big advocate of goals that originate from multidisciplinary Individualised Learning Plans (ILPs or IEPs), especially when the goals are related to clinical or additional assessments that have been conducted. And perhaps these ILP goals relate to objectives specific to that student’s individualised plan.

BUT I do not see much point of teachers creating individualised goals for every student, based on … well … a mix of student and teacher nominated ideas.

Why no extra goals? Because what I have seen in practice is a lot of time spent goal making, and very little in the way of working towards these goals.

Should teachers be expected to manage 25 different student goals when planning everyday lessons? No. I think this is quite unworkable.

I think teachers should have curricular goals, and objectives for units and lessons; and I think that adaptive teaching techniques should be used to adapt the supports provided to help students reach those goals no matter their starting point.

What is often forgotten when ideas are floated regarding student goal-making is that motivation is not a linear process from:

engagement —> motivation —> achievement ❌

In fact, emerging evidence shows that the process is at least bi-directional, if not actually the opposite:

achievement/success —> motivation —> engagement ✅

Greg Ashman has addressed this numerous times in his work, so do have a look at this argument.

Check out the following:

• Read up on Peps Mccrea’s work on motivation here for example

• See this brief article featuring a panel about achievement and motivation

• Read the slides from my talk on student agency and the science of learning at SBP high country
  

💬 What does research-informed teaching look like in upper secondary? Is it different to prior years?

I was asked this great question from teacher and leader Mieke, and had the pleasure of meeting this inspiring educator during the Teaching Matters conference in Hobart. Here is a sample of the question she asked:

I’m a year 7 and 8 English and HASS teacher from a new independent secondary school in Tassie. We are adding a year level each year, having commenced with two year 7 classes in 2023. We have recently formed our steering committee for year 9 and 10, and our leadership team posed the question:
 What might year 9 and 10 look like in a school with firm foundations in the science of reading and learning?

More context:
Our year 7 and 8 program features structured, explicit instruction, with deliberate practice and daily review. We have poured huge amounts of time into tier I English and maths instruction, and we have English and maths Targeted Growth sessions 3x a week, with all students attending a small group for weekly-ish formative assessment data-informed intervention, consolidation or extension.

We have a crew of hard-working school-based apprentices and undergraduate teaching students working part-time as learning aides who make these ‘all-in’ sessions possible.
In English, we explicitly teach vocab, morphology, etymology, syntax (The Writing Revolution), reading fluency, text structures and literary devices embedded within knowledge-based units on survival, urbanisation, advertising, wolves, oppression etc. We have tier III reading and spelling intervention 3x a week using PhOrMeS and small group Questioning the Author style comprehension sessions with decodable texts. Our work on improving our instruction is flowing over into HASS, Science and Health courses. Our afternoons are hands-on, with P.E., materials, arts, design etc. We fiercely protect our morning periods in weeks 1-7 from interruptions and other events.


We want year 9 and 10 to feel distinctly different from 7 and 8, but our values and tight practices will remain the same. Our Head of Secondary is a courageous, galvanising, let’s-try-it leader, who has raised four teenagers and gets it.

I have a very brief answer below. But I’d love this short answer to be tackled by you as well ! Let me know if you feel differently.

In upper secondary (as opposed to early secondary or primary).

• Foundational skills and knowledge should be crystalising, and there might be more opportunity to use these foundations for more advanced learning;

• Your learning objectives should involve more time spent on greater challenge, more application, and more open-ended responses - that's not to say that the foundations do not matter, or that you don't teach explicitly anymore - you certainly should. But perhaps you can add in more challenge AFTER the explicit teaching of a unit;

• Your routines might adapt slightly for a somewhat 'cooler' audience, but you'd be surprised what even secondary students will be happy with when they feel part of a team experience! So keep those expectations high.


That's what I've got for now. But there is more available in the work of my colleagues!

Check out the following:

Rebecca Birch on Science of Learning in secondary:

Article featuring Trisha Jha on the science of learning in schools

Explicit instruction practice guide.

Endnote

If you feel any of these shorter responses are worthy of their own blog posts do let me know in the comments!

Nathaniel Swain, PhD is a teacher, instructional coach, and teacher educator. He is a Senior Lecturer in Learning Sciences at La Trobe University School of Education, Australia, and founder of Think Forward Educators.

The Book

Pre order is open for Harnessing the science of learning. This book is a new volume I have had the pleasure of writing, with help from some amazing contributors: Pamela Snow, Tanya Serry, Zach Groshell, Reid Smith, Toni Hatten-Roberts, Simon Breakspear, Katie Roberts-Hull, David Morkunas, Steven Capp, Shane Pearson, and Eamon Charles.

You can secure your pre-order copy (or maybe one of your colleague or leaders on the fence) from any great bookstore. For example: Amazon Australia, Amazon US, Amazon UK.